Force Lectures- GOVT380

Force Lectures- GOVT380 - Violence Use Of Force Regulation...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Violence: Use Of Force, Regulation of Violence LEGAL JUSTIFICATIONS FOR WAR jus ad bellum- law as regarding going to war/force. When you use it. jus in bello- law in war, law of intl conflict, international humanitarian law, means and methods of warfare. How you use it jus in bello - law applicable to occupation -One of scenarios to which this law applies. -In following weeks, law after conflict. 1) Framework 2) Various justifications through case scenarios -Use of force in Iraq 1990-91 -Kosovo 1999 -Afghanistan 2003 -Iraq 2003-4 -Looking at claims and counterclaims by various actors to try and give an overview of various justifications. -Use of force, highly contested by whole number of people. -Whole area relating to use of force giving intl law a bad name. -High-profile area of intl law. -Goldstone Report- jus in bello -UN Charter- adopted 1945 aftermath WWII -First prohibit use of force in international relations, revolutionary -Up until then attempts to limit attempts of use of war. -Attempts to create alternatives to war- arbitration -Prior to UN charter, no absolute prohibition -One of key principles prohibits member states in IR from threat or use of force to the independence of state. -Article 2 (4)- jus cogens -Also highly controversial. -Wording -Use of force in IR, says nothing at all of internal relations. -Notice what is prohibited is threat or use of force, not prohibition against war, war not used in UN charter except in describing WWII -Didnt want semantics to get in way, so its encompassing all uses of force. -Threat or use- broad -What constitutes force not spelled out. Economic warfare? other forms of forcing state to behave in certain way that doesnt involve military. -Comprehensive? Use of force that is against territorial integrity or indepence of state that is prohibited, if it doesnt threaten political ind. and consistent with UN could that be said not to be prohibited by UN Charter? -Entebe Raid- Israel uses force in Uganda at Entebbe airport to rescue several Israeli passengers from hijacked airliner, specific mission. - Within charter only 2 exceptions of 2 (4) Whole point of charter, if unilateral use prohibited states must have protection somehow, relate to state security
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
1) collective security- essentially focussed on Security Council, given primary responsibility for international peace and security . -Chapter 7 sets out Security Council powers related to this -Article 39/Chapter 7- S.C can declare there has been a breach of peace, act of aggression. -Security Council can then act in certain ways: 1) Art 41- sanctions 2) Art 42- impose other measures including military response. -Problem: under charter scheme was that S.C would have UN forces under its disposal, states would put at its disposal forces, but cold War intervenes, with cold war, states were not prepared to put forces at disposal of S.C that might be contrary to their interests. -S.C never been able to authorize use of such force. instead S.C on two occasions has
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 6

Force Lectures- GOVT380 - Violence Use Of Force Regulation...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online